Sacramento daily record-union., 1887-08-15
A SINGULAR CODE OF HONOR.

too prevalent idea possesses a portion of
the social membership that honor" binds
a man, who would be esteemed among his
fellows, not to "give away" the crimes of
those that may be discovered to him by
reason of the relationship of principal and
agent, or employer and employe, etc.
1t is false and dangerously vicious idea,
and one, unhappily, that obtains to con-
siderable extent-that is to say, there is a
loose disposition to condemn and revile
Che man who, learning by reason of the
trust reposed in him that crime is being
committed by his principal or associate,
makes revelation of it. The thief praises
UNNECESSARILY his pal" who is gritty +"
enough 10 refuse to "peach," as thieves
state it, to give up the offender and reveal
him to the law. The murderer holds his
accomplice as worthy his loathing and
contempt who turns States evidence. And
for this class there may be entertained
some grain of sympathy when one of their
own kind seeks shelter by surrendering
their fellows.
But the ethics of this code Of honor
have been expanded in these days, by a
few, to include mer guiltless themselves
and to constrain them by silence to par
take of the criminality of those in au-
thority over them. 1t is pernicious doc
trine, and exasperates men whose ideas of
honor are formulated according to the bet
ter standards.
The brave man is he who, knowing, but
not partaking, reveals The coward is he
who, knowing, makes himself subservient
to villainy by failing to reveal because the
rascal happens to be his superior in place
The accomplice in crime is he who hold.
to this new code of honor and breaches it
Not many months ago gentleman exer.
cising an important Federal trust in thi,
State needed to call to his assistance q
competent deputy, and looked around hin
for such clerical aid, When about to offe,
the position to a young man who solicitet
IT, he was warned not to employ the man
because he could not be trusted. Sur
prlsed az such a judgment concerning one
who stood well in the community, ht
pressed his advisers for reasons for theil
objections. He was thereupon told tha
the proposed assistant was unreliable,
because, should his principal become Gin
volved" in his accounts or maladminister
and divert his trust, the deputy woult
certainly "give him away" The reply tt
this warning was, "Then he is Just th
man ! want And he appointed hin
forthwith.
In recent criminal trial in San Fran
cisco b before Federal Court, the repnta
tion of prosecuting witness was assailed
and 1t was declared to be bad, and the wit
ness who thus testified, claiming good re-
pute for himself, gave, among other rea
sons for the belief that the assailed part,
was Sneak and witness had heard hin
spoken OF as such, and as ''treacherous,'
as one who would give men away" Being
pressed for his explicit reasons for enter
tanning such an opinion of the man. tn,
witness replied to the question of sur
prised juror, that having discovered the de
falcation of the principal in an Office
Were he was deputy, the man wa.
treacherous because he revealed tho
misdeeds to one in authority over the of
fender. The idea was coolly advanced tina,
the deputy should have held his peace. o,
have communicated with no other than hi.
principal, and was a "sneak" because h,
gave him away; that is TO say, becaus,
the deputy refused to become an accom-
pliee after the fact, because he reported tho
crime to the chief supervising authority he
did wrong, and was untrustworthr. And
this peculiar idea of "honor," rectitude and
duty, was boldly advanced under oath, and
the insineerity Of its advocacy cannot
therefore be questioned. II is no wonder
that the intelligent juror was so surprised
by this new Interpretation of the mora
code that he pressed the witness to ex
plain it.
II is possible that the honor the provert
assigns residence among thieves, NAV Jus
tiiy the observance of this peculiar rule
among them. But that in this, day of light
and intelligence, of responsibility and
progressive ideas and moral clcarness, such
doctrine should be defended in open Court
is simply amazing. II testifies to the stra-
bismus Of the moral perceptions of those
who advance such code. 1t is scarcely
probable that men Of business who intrilsl
grave matters to agents, would sustain the
clerical aids Of such agents in the practice
of such = code, however henest they might
be themselves. For ii moves upon so low
plane, and exists only in an atmosphere Of
such un5lushing dishonesty, and is ST
mean conception of honor and of duty
that 1t may well amaze men of ordinar,
intelligence TO find it nonchalantly aired
amid the very droppings of justice. Ye,
1t Is fact that such code does obtain in
practice, and to greater extent than
most people suppose. To refuse to give
away > is preached by a class, as one of the
courageous traits Of character, but fortu
nately the advocates possessing tn,
eiirontry to advance it are few. Ii is ne
small matter that such ideas of honor
however, should obtain at all. For it i
the entertainment of such ideas that ha
lei many victim to a dishonored grave
and coffined the ambitions of young man
hood in innumerable cases. 1t is such in
depreciation of the common moralities that
unrcbuked, would poison the very foun
tain of social order, and promote vicious
nss, into an epidemic of dishonesty.